SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(Cal) 142

A.K.SENGUPTA, SHYAMAL KUMAR SEN
Endogram Tea Co. Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner Of Income-Tax – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Debi Prasad Pal, Anil Roy Chaudhury

JUDGMENT

Shyamal Kumar Sen, J.

1. IN this application under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following questions have been referred to this court for determination :

"(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that payment of Rs. 10 lakhs to Messrs. Octavius Steel and Co. Ltd. under the agreement dated March 10, 1983, was capital in nature and hence was not admissible as a revenue expenditure ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the disallowance of litigation expenses of Rs. 1,05,019 claimed by the assessee as revenue expenditure ?"

2. THE facts leading to the reference, inter alia, are that the year of assessment involved is 1982-83. The assessee is a non-resident company having its head office in the U. K. and was carrying on the business of cultivation and manufacture of tea in India and sale thereof in and outside India. It has no other branch in any other country except its head office in the U. K. The assessee-company entered into an agreement dated December 17, 1975, to sell its Coombergram Tea Estate to Messrs. Octavius Steel and Co.


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top